Re: Why people still want to encode precomposed letters

From: Andrew West (
Date: Wed Nov 19 2008 - 04:44:28 CST

  • Next message: Kent Karlsson: "Re: Why people still want to encode precomposed letters"

    2008/11/18 Kenneth Whistler <>:
    > Andrew West responded:
    >> <>
    > To which my comment is assuredly not. Unicode named sequences
    > are not nor have they ever been intended to serve as
    > guidance for font developers about what glyphs should or should
    > not be supported for fonts.

    UAX 34 (which you wrote) would seem support your confident assertion
    that named sequences are not intended to act as guidance for font
    developers. But I wonder how widely accepted this orthodoxy is amongst
    UTC members.

    For example, on Saturday 10th September 2005 Mark Davis wrote on the
    Unicode list <>

    "I think we are in agreement on named sequences; they should give
    guidance to font developers as to which char sequences may need a
    precomposed glyph."

    Perhaps in the intervening three years his understanding of named
    sequences has changed, but this statement on the public Unicode list
    by the president of the Unicode Consotium has certainly informed my
    understanding of what named sequences are about.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 19 2008 - 04:47:34 CST